ArticleJournal of community genetics2025
Genetic exceptionalism and genomic contextualism among Asian Americans: a qualitative study.
Article in Journal of community genetics, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Views on genetic information - and how it compares to other health information - play a key role in shaping policy surrounding its treatment, management, and communication. Genetic exceptionalism and genomic contextualism are important frameworks to better understand how communities view genetic information in comparison to other medical data. This study aimed to explore how Asian Americans view genetic information and what factors influence their views. Using a qualitative study design guided by reflexive thematic analysis, we interviewed 20 ostensibly healthy Asian American adults about their attitudes toward and experiences with genetic information. We developed four themes: first, participants discussed diverse potential uses and qualities of genetic information that distinguished it from other types of health information, such as providing insight into future health conditions. However, they underscored the continued importance of other types of health information depending on context, and did not view genetic information as deterministic or the essence, giving weight to environmental contributors in molding who they are. Views on genetic information were shaped by complex, interacting factors at individual, family, and community or cultural levels, such as stigma, intersectional identities, and family dynamics. Participants had overall limited awareness of clinical genetics services and indications genetic testing could be offered for, despite high self-reported health literacy. Our participants' views on genetic information were complex and context-dependent, in line with genomic contextualism. This should be considered in providing culturally-engaged genetics education and developing genomics policies that reflect how diverse communities truly feel about genetic information.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.